Welcome to the Podiatry Arena forums

You are currently viewing our podiatry forum as a guest which gives you limited access to view all podiatry discussions and access our other features. By joining our free global community of Podiatrists and other interested foot health care professionals you will have access to post podiatry topics (answer and ask questions), communicate privately with other members, upload content, view attachments, receive a weekly email update of new discussions, access other special features. Registered users do not get displayed the advertisements in posted messages. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our global Podiatry community today!

  1. Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Have you considered the Clinical Biomechanics Boot Camp Online, for taking it to the next level? See here for more.
Dismiss Notice
Have you liked us on Facebook to get our updates? Please do. Click here for our Facebook page.
Dismiss Notice
Do you get the weekly newsletter that Podiatry Arena sends out to update everybody? If not, click here to organise this.

Barefoot Running Debate

Discussion in 'Biomechanics, Sports and Foot orthoses' started by Kevin Kirby, Jan 21, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. footface

    footface Active Member

    ironically, I've recently reduced my barefoot/five finger running and picked up 2 injuries in quick succession. A grade 2 sprained ankle (left leg) and a calf strain (right leg). Now I'm not trying to suggest that these are related in anyway because they aren't, the ankle sprain was sustained while running in the moors (par for the course) and the calf strain I suspect is overuse as I was a little sore and still raced hard to gain a PB last weekend so it's my own fault. Just ironic that all the media have been banging on about barefoot running being a magic injury reduction formula and I get injured as soon as I stop doing it. Typical.

    If you want to talk about barefoot lifestyle, over in the uk we had a guy known as the leopard man of skye who used to live in a shed on the isle of skye in a very hermit like lifestyle. Some people are just slightly odd that way I think Leopard man
     
  2. smelo_99

    smelo_99 Welcome New Poster

    I would say that, in regards to the subject, nothing is obvious. I have suffered for plantar fasciitis a lot in the past and it completely stopped when I started running in minimalist shoes. Obviously, it is anedoctal experience and, therefore, it does not prove anything. However, in my case, it was difficult not to correlate the facts, since I have tried to change again to a traditional shoe and the pain appeared again. Changed back to minimalist shoe and it dissapeared. I would say that the word "obvious" should be used careful and that anedoctal experience is extremely valid, although probably only for the person who experienced it.
     
  3. DaVinci

    DaVinci Well-Known Member

    So how do you explain all the cases of plantar fasciitis, stress fractures and midfoot interosseous compression syndrome that barefoot/minimalist runners are getting in what seems to be epidemic proportions? I do not see many runners in my clinic, but lately over half the ones I have seen are barefoot or minimalist runners. Given that my impression is that barefoot runers make up less than 0.01% of runners, and if 50% of the runners I see with an injury are barefoot, then should not alarm bells be going off?
     
  4. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    I see the latest Canadian Medical Association Journal has an article on this:
    The rise of barefoot running
    Myself and Kevin were interviewed for it.
     
  5. smelo_99

    smelo_99 Welcome New Poster

    OK, I understand your point :good:. However, let me try to think out of the box here. First of all, let me point out that I am not an advocate of barefoot or minimalist running.

    What I was wondering is that maybe, let me say that again, maybe, most of the people who try to change to midfoot running do it too soon too fast. This is what I have seen around. The typical case is that the person suffers some pain and is already used to run more than 12 miles in a typical practice. Then he does not want to start a long adaptive process and rather just changes the stride pattern over the same usual course. The most obvious outcome is an injury. Believe me, I have seen this happening a lot. I would say that, although in internet forums it seems that the opposite is true, that is the most usual pattern.

    Now let's imagine the opposite. Let's wonder, just wonder, that everybody was barefoot runners, most (or all) of them mid-strikers. Now let's suppose that, suddenly, some of them (less than 0.01%) started to run using running shoes. Probably you would be saying that the same thing (or the analogue) would be happening in your clinic. You would see a lot of people suffering hip and knee problems (let's keep the fasciitis out), and probably 50% would be running shoe users. Does it make sense to you?

    Probably the whole community of barefoot runners is biased, since the main motivation to stop using shoes seems to be recurring injuries, therefore it is not fair to compare it to any other running group, unless this factor is taken in to account.

    Sorry if my English is not perfect, as I am not native.
     
  6. footface

    footface Active Member

    Interesting article, and quite well balanced. I agree with you Kevin, adopting barefoot in response to injury is probably a bad idea (except maybe in unusual cases) but using barefoot as a training tool seems a sensible idea to me.

    Did any of you guys on here see this picture

    [​IMG]

    which is purportedly from a runner who switched to barefoot running and saw a dramatic change in the arch and position of his foot over a period of 6 months. Now I don't know any other details about this such as how the pictures were produced or how legitimate they are, so please don't bother asking. I just thought they might interest you
     
  7. DaVinci

    DaVinci Well-Known Member

    OMG! You can take any foot and photograph it in a pronated and supinated position and get the same images! We have no way of knowing if this was done that way or not.
    Interesting how the barefoot running websites tout that photograph without any doubts. Is that because they 'want to believe'?
     
  8. footface

    footface Active Member

    I must confess to the same doubts myself hence why I mentioned the legitimacy of the pictures. Now if these were taken in a lab setting using the same equipment each time and done whilst the runner was in motion rather than just a simple print then it would be much more interesting
     
  9. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    If you look closely at the Nov 2010 image ... does it appear to you that the first met is not as loaded as the Jun 2010 image? It is a bit hard to tell, but if it is, then its faked. The foot is being held supinated in the Nov 2010 image! If the arch had truly been 'reformed', then you would expect more loading under the first met head area.

    Having said that, I have no doubt that their is changes in arch morphology with barefoot running. HOWEVER, we know that muscle strength is not related to arch height (ref) which is widely touted by the Evangelists from the Church of Barefoot Running, so I think that what is going on is that there is a greater range of hallux dorsiflexion during barefoot running and this would create a greater first ray plantarflexion and windlass effect --> that would affect arch height (this seems much more plausible to me than the muscle strength affecting arch height)..... but then we know that there is no correlation between arch height and injury so not sure why they think that this is so important.
     
  10. Craig:

    Do you keep thinking you are saying the same things over and over again in these interviews????:deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse:
     
  11. That is certainly how I feel....I'm saying the same things over and over and over.........:deadhorse::deadhorse::deadhorse:
     
  12. footface

    footface Active Member

    Totally agree, I have fairly flat feet myself. Flat as in I have a fairly long low arch and a low foot, that said it doesn't affect my running gait as the arch etc. still performs normally. I've done plenty of barefoot running as well as much more shod running and my arch remains much the same as it was.

    So far we have arch height, and impact that are touted to cause injury and both are known not to do so. I still maintain that barefoot is good for running form though. That's why I use it because it helps teach me to keep my step light and my cadence high. Other than that I'm still not convinced on any of the other "alleged" benefits
     
  13. Dana Roueche

    Dana Roueche Well-Known Member

    Kevin, I had to laugh when I read this. In a discussion I had with a running friend back in February, I told him I was reading a thread about the barefoot running debate on a podiatry forum. I said that after a few months and about 150 posts, the thread has played itself out and had been repeating itself. Here we are with close to 1000 posts with the same points being made over and over.

    In the meantime, I have also read quite a few articles, blogs, forums, marketing adds, whatever on the web discussing this subject. At this point, I think it is safe to conclude that everyone who is inclined to weigh on the subject has done so, with many weighing in over and over.

    Now with all of the opinions out there and being repeated endlessly, it is time to just let let this play out. People may or may not read the opinions but they ultimately will decide what they want to do and will probably adjust based on what they personally experience.

    Without any new information on the subject, I have to say one's time can be better spent focusing on something else.

    Dana
     
  14. footface

    footface Active Member

    I've decided to try Bearfoot running instead

    [​IMG]
     
  15. Dana:

    With nearly 1,000 posts now on this thread, there is bound to be some repetition. I've now done about 10 interviews over the past 9 months for various magazines, online journals and even a book on the subject of barefoot running and minimalist shoes. If I'm lucky, all the hype will die down soon since I feel like I am saying the same thing over and over again. My hope is that all of this debate over barefoot running and minimalist shoes will give runners more choices toward being able to be more injury-free in their training and racing activities.:drinks
     
  16. Griff

    Griff Moderator

  17. Griff

    Griff Moderator

  18. Unbelievable!! And this guy is a professor??:bang::bash::butcher:
     
  19. Jumping on the bandwagon to try and make a quick buck is how he came across to me.
     
  20. zimmy

    zimmy Member

  21. Dana Roueche

    Dana Roueche Well-Known Member

    That was a waste of 3 minutes. One guy with no shoes and two women with 4 inch spiked heels and no one with anything intelligent to say.

    Dana
     
  22. It has been now over a half-century since a major marathon has been won by a barefoot runner (Abebe Bikila-1960) but we are still hearing from the Church of Barefoot Running how it is so much better to be running barefoot than in shoes.

    As I said early on in this thread, the barefoot running zealots won't be taken seriously by the vast majority of runners until they start winning some significant races, while barefoot. Until then, it's just another fad that we will have nearly forgotten and be laughing about in other 5 years.
     
  23. smelo_99

    smelo_99 Welcome New Poster

    What if someday in the future it is proven that running barefoot makes you run slower, but with fewer injuries? In this case you would probably never see elite athletes adopting it, but it wouldn't be considered a fad either. It would most likely be a choice for people with a long history of injuries.

    Let's remember that elite athletes have all the reasons to use shoes, starting with the fact that their sponsors are shoe makers. In their case I would not run barefoot, unless it was proven that it improves performance significantly, which, in my opinion and based on anecdotal experience, is not the case. We need to think also that running barefoot requires a long adaptive process, and a professional will not choose it unless the benefits are clearly proven.

    In my opinion running with a proper form, not necessarily barefoot, is a good choice. Apparently a midfoot strike is better than land on the heels. It uses more your calves and feet muscles and less your knee and hip joints, which seems to be good. After an adaptive process, it is clearly seen that your leg gets stronger. However, it can cause different injuries than the heel strike, so it can even be worse for some people. I would say that, if someone is used to heel strike for years without any major problem, I don’t think there is a reason to change. But for some people who suffer with injuries, it can be an option. Walking barefoot at home, at least to me, has been very good. I don’t think walking barefoot in the streets is a good choice.

    :santa:
     
  24. Dana Roueche

    Dana Roueche Well-Known Member

    Kevin, :deadhorse:

    Your comments are really beside the point. I don't think I've ever read or heard from anyone claiming that by running barefoot you can win Olympic marathons or any other race for that matter.

    I thought the debate was about whether running barefoot over wearing traditional shoes was a healthier path to follow. I'm not sure what it has to do with anyone winning races.

    Dana
     
  25. The point is that the barefoot running community has made and continues to make claims that barefoot running is better than shod running. If that were truly the case, then a reasonable person would equate that to mean that faster performances and lower injury rates will occur when running barefoot than when running in shoes.

    As far as a lower injury rate while running barefoot versus running shod, there is not a speck of research evidence that this is true. In fact, most runners in non-third world countries simply couldn't run all their miles barefoot since their are habituated to wearing shoes in their other weightbearing activities.

    However, in regards to running performance, if barefoot running was truly better than shod running, as the many barefoot running websites and blogs claim, then we should be seeing improved running performances and more barefoot runners winning races. However, if we were to look over the thousands of international and national running competitiions over the past 50 years, and we could eliminate our biases and objectively analyze whether shoes make a runner faster or not, there is no doubt that it would be concluded that running in shoes makes a runner faster than running barefoot due to the miniscule number of elite athletes who choose to race and microscopic number of athletes who win races while barefoot.

    Therefore, when I stated that the barefoot runners won't be taken seriously by the vast majority of runners until they start winning some significant races while barefoot, I meant that in order for the "barefoot running movement" to gain ground and to be more than a passing fad practiced regularly by a very, very small minority of runners, they will need to start winning some races while running barefoot so that other runners will become more interested in possibly trying barefoot running to improve their racing times.

    As for me and my running, I have run in shoes for well over 40 years, and though I am not as fast as I previously was, I still enjoy being able to run, and still enjoy running in shoes. As far as my practice, I have treated many beginning runners, average runners and many of the best runners here in the greater metropolitan Sacramento area over the past 25+ years. When the subject of barefoot running comes up, the vast majority of them don't understand why any sane runner would want to run barefoot.

    Therefore, from my own personal experience as a runner for over four decades and my quarter century of treating runners and being involved in the running community here in Northern California, my conclusion is that barefoot running is simply a passing fad that will soon fade away once it's newness has worn off and the media no longer finds it interesting.

    I predict that the next big news item that will push barefoot running aside as a news item will be running shoes that do improve running performance. These technologically advanced running shoes will force race directors and the governing bodies of the athletic organizations to question whether these shoes will be allowed in races and whether records set in these shoes should be allowed in the record books. Even though this has already been somewhat of an issue with the Spira Shoe, I expect it to be an even bigger news story within the next decade.
     
  26. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    I find that quite insulting to the intelligence of elite athletes. Don't you think they would be looking for every millisecond of advantage; if they could get that from barefoot then they would be doing it. They have a smart group of all sorts of specialists surrounding them looking for those advantages. To suggest they only wear the shoes because of sponsorship is an insult to them. To start claiming that its because of sponsorship issues is to move into the ‘conspiracy’ theory territory that ‘Born to Run’ sucked so many gullible people in with.
    No its not. That is NOT what the research evidence is showing. The evidence is showing that there is not one style that is best for each runner. In another thread (which I cannot find now) there was a video clip of the top finishers in the world triathlon series. These were the best of the best. Some were midfoot strikers, some were heel strikers some were forefoot strikers. How come the ‘best of the best’ can get to that level with no one particular style of running.
    Also earlier in this thread we discussed some upcoming research from Joe Hamill that shows that transitioning from heel strike to midfoot strike is associated with biomechanical inefficiencies. If I recall what Joe said correctly, these inefficiences were not present in the natural heel strikers and were not oresent in the natural midfoot strikers; they were only present in those that transitioned.
     
  27. Yeah, and they'd have their sponsors logo's tattooed onto their feet.

    Modern athletes appear to perform better in shoes designed for their chosen events. Why is this?
     
  28. heres the post for the video http://www.podiatry-arena.com/podiatry-forum/showpost.php?p=139601&postcount=15
    provided by swheels
     
  29. smelo_99

    smelo_99 Welcome New Poster

    I didn't say elite athletes ONLY wear shoes because of sponsorship, which would even insult my intelligence. All I am trying to say is that, all the other things being equal, they would choose to wear shoes. And that they would not change their approach unless there is some strong evidence on the subject, which, I think we all agree, is not the case (yet?, just kidding).

    I like this approach. It even implies that sometimes forefoot strike can be better.

    Also Pete Larson, from the excellent Problogger.com (non-barefoot runner) has done some high quality movies with elite athletes at Boston Marathon and did not find any trend regarding heel of forefoot striking. However, I don't think that prove anything. Although some of the barefoot runners say that running barefoot is faster than shod, I don't think that is the main argument in favor of the forefoot striking. The main point is injury prevention.

    That is interesting. I would like to read that. Maybe it would also be interesting to see if the opposite is true, I mean the transition from forefoot to heel strike also causing (or not) inefficiencies.

    Probably for some people it is better to forefoot, for some is to heel strike. Although 'Born to Run' has a lot of mistakes (in my opinion), I think it points out correctly that it is difficult to believe that human beings really need shoes to run. Sorry about that. Maybe that is because some of you run for more than 20 years and I run for 2 years, I don't share the same paradigm. I don't believe an alien coming from mars would believe it.

    Anyway, to me the main discussion is not if forefoot strike is better. People who ask for help should, at this point, be presented with both options. The problem is in the transition. We should, thus, make sure that people, if they want to change their stride pattern, transition in the right way.
     
  30. Dana Roueche

    Dana Roueche Well-Known Member

    If this is a passing fad generated by the claims of a few who support it, what I find curious is why you feel so threatened by it and why you spend so much time on the subject. What I have found fascinating is just how wound up people have been about this subject. It has held my interest far longer than I expected.

    The question of the day regarding running barefoot, WHO CARES?

    Dana
     
  31. JB1973

    JB1973 Active Member

    The question of the day regarding running barefoot, WHO CARES?


    Dana
    in my view its more to do with misrepresentation of research and the blatant lies that are getting peddled by some. Barefoot running is the vehicle and subject this time but as kevin says, that will pass and it will be something else soon.

    and as far as "who cares". we are nearly at 1000 posts!!
     
  32. Craig Payne

    Craig Payne Moderator

    Articles:
    8
    This just turned up on You Tube. A few familar faces in it:



    I like the comment from Chris McDougal admitting the lack of research .... what about all the research he touted in Born to Run? Is he finally admitting that he misused and misrepresented and misquoted it and that there is actually no research that support it? What about all the research claimed earlier in this thread by barefoot runners to support barefoot running? We still waiting for them to come back and tell us what the research is they are referring to actually is!

    Yes, there is also a lack of research on running shoes. But can someone please explain to me exactly how a lack of research on running shoes actually shows that barefoot running is better? I don't get the logic. Its all about who is making the unsubstantiated claims.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 22, 2016
  33. Dana Roueche

    Dana Roueche Well-Known Member

    A handful of opinions repeated hundreds of times.

    At this point, everyone has had their say, everyone has decided on their point of view and the world has not ended. The only thing that's been demonstrated in 1000 posts is that you can't control what people say or think, regardless of whether it is true, false or simply misrepresented.

    Dana
     
  34. Dana Roueche

    Dana Roueche Well-Known Member

    Kevin, what has kept me around the INTERNATIONAL ACADEMIC PODIATRY FORUM is the entertainment value that it once provided. I have gotten quite a few laughs reading opinions from the self described experts which are just as full of unsubstantiated, emotional hot air as those they disagree with.

    When I've questioned the gas that's been spewed around on this forum, the responses have been entirely predictable and continue to be. That in itself has been a huge laugh.

    Unfortunately, all of this is becoming redundant and boring. At this point I am convinced that the excessive contributors on this forum have nothing new to say, that they will never see beyond their own point of view and that what is being said has run it's course long ago. At this point everyone is just circling the wagons.


    Dana
     
  35. Tuckersm

    Tuckersm Well-Known Member

    And you will never see an Australian Triathalon Champion barefoot on the run leg either

    But the IAAF allows barefoot running
     
  36. Dana Roueche

    Dana Roueche Well-Known Member

    Kevin,

    In spite of your long list of qualifications that make you an expert on the subject of barefoot vs shod running, the fact is that Chris McDougall is the one who authored a best selling book and Chris McDougall is the one who is enjoying watching his bank account grow. While you are trying to convince people that this is a passing fad and are suggesting people run on a golf course, Chris continues to sell books.

    It is classically comical that McDougall writes a book, it unsettles the podiatry community which becomes vocal which in turn helps McDougall sell more books. Meanwhile, since McDougall has a lock on the book thing, the next best way to capitalize is to sell products that attempt to encourage form similar to barefoot running. Enter Vibrams, several people from the podiatry community claim there is an epidemic of stress fractures coming from wearing Vibrams meanwhile Vibrams are trying with all their might to boost production to meet it's overwhelming demand. A while back a Vibram executive said they stopped introducing new models of Fivefingers until they can catch up with the demand on their current models. They have been building their production geometrically for the last 5 yrs.

    What I find totally amazing about the Vibram story is that they where able to knock the gigantic shoe industry on it's ear with the introduction of it's very first shoe model. Until the Fivefingers, Vibram only made soles for other shoe makers.

    It really isn't about qualifications or who has the most framed certificates signed by Peter Pod on their office wall, it is about who has captured people's attention. It is about who is influencing the way people think. It is about who is influencing the product lines produced by the gigantic shoe industry. It is about what people are spending their money on. Right now I would say that is Born to Run and Vibram shoes.

    Sure, this may be a passing fad but it won't come and go without an influence on the running community and the running shoe industry. With respect to running and running shoes, I welcome the next idea that comes along to replace this idea. I also hope it gains as much attention and living in a capitalistic world, I wish the owner of the next idea as much success as Chris McDougall and Vibram have had. The way I see it, I am the one to benefit with new and hopefully insightful ideas and associated products.

    Dana
     
  37. Dana:

    Thanks for your "expert" analysis on this subject.:rolleyes:
     
  38. Dana Roueche

    Dana Roueche Well-Known Member

    Kevin:

    Thank you. Not sure what you need to be an expert in to make observations about the obvious but thank you for your support. Hopefully others in addition to yourself will find my comments insightful.

    Have a happy New Year and keep up the good work.

    Dana
     
  39. Paulo Silva

    Paulo Silva Active Member

    Hi I wonder if you can give a little help on this:

    I want to make a little text to answer a text in a local running magazine about the issue of barefoot running and Vibram FF, I'm looking to data regarding:

    The prevalence of running injuries from the 70's to today (the text claims knee injuries had lower incidence in the 70's), I do know that comparing the 70's to today is not the way but I image the knee injuries incidence its similar, can you post some data on that?

    They quote a "study" by Bernard Marti from the Bern university claiming runners in expensive shoes are 123% more prone to get injuries comparing tho not so expensive shoes. My understanding is that was that this was an inquiring not a study, do you have information on this?

    They quote one alleged 1991 study published in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise with similar results as the above, do you have a copy o this?

    They also quote a 1988 Barry Bates from the laboratory o Biomechanics/Sports Medicine of the University of Oregon, claiming used running shoes wore better than new ones.

    They also claim that Runner's World magazine admitted they made an error by advising runners to use stability/motion control running shoes to plantar fasciitis runners.

    I just want to make a balanced text explaining that simply there is no evidence that barefoot running is better or worse for runners, all help is welcome.

    tanks in advance
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page